it may never be possible. you assume they MUST have an actual definate unchanging size. i would think that a natural consequence of string theory would be that they couldn't, and would in fact pulsate at different rates and amounts.
On 6/28/07, Jones Beene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
BTW - For those who might harbor a lingering suspicion that many things in physics, from the basics to the complex, are not well known in 2007 - consider something as basic as the diameter and geometry of the particles of matter: electron, proton, and neutron. There is no firm agreement (or even close approximation) on this, AFAIK! We "kind of" assume they are spherical, but even that is debateable. So-called "authoritative" references for the neutron's diameter, for instance, can be found from about 10^(-15) meters to about about 10^(-10) meters, a variation of 5 orders of magnitude ! Of course, there are no firm "boundaries" for these entities anyway, and often one hears the particles (esp the electron) described as a "smear." Little more than a cop-out. College textbooks are notoriously in disagreement with current results, and can be off by orders of magnitude over information coming from some national labs. There are reasons for this relating to publication costs, but still.... Just now, in response to reading a reference claiming a surprisingly large discrepancy between the diameter of the proton and neutron, I have been looking at various online resources, which vary all over the place. To be honest, I cannot find a satisfactory answer, but that is not the purpose of this posting. In the process of surfing for info - a new (new-to-me) theory (TOE) has been found which has some alluring ideas (and obvious problems) but I have not read nor seen the inevitable criticism of it - so I will simply throw out the reference for anyone whose interests may be tickled by the idea of an underlying photonic basis for all matter: http://photontheory.com/willis.htm "The main idea of the paper is that an electron is created when two gamma ray of very high frequency interact and "bend" so strongly that a stable resonating 'circle' results. An equation to find the diameter of the electron from its mass is derived from three other basic equations. The diameter of the electron is found to be several orders of magnitude larger than previously accepted." First of all: There are other similar "wave" theories, and there is arguably 'nothing new under the sun' here... and other theories can add or improve on some of these ideas: the best of which sites is the site maintained by Geoff Haselhurst and mentioned a few years ago: http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg01542.html which relates to Milo Wolff's theories: http://www.spaceandmotion.com/#Milo.Wolff and also there is another : http://www.glafreniere.com/sa_wavetheory.htm ... and "The Photonic Theory of Everything" by Vernon Brown http://photontheory.com/pte.html .. and if the "wave" is the equivalent of "motion" then the ideas of Dewey Larsen are in play. Anyway the basic idea (of Willis H. Thompson) is that an electron is created when a gamma ray of very high frequency interacts with a similar ray. The gamma rays are bent so strongly that they forms a stable resonating paired circle. An equation to find the diameter of the electron from its mass can be derived from three other basic equations. The diameter of the electron is found to be several orders of magnitude larger than previously accepted. I am left with the gut feeling that if anyone with a strong math background (and unlimited patience) could/would revise and resolve all of these similar theories (including R. Mills without his numerous errors) that an adequate TOE would emerge from such a melange. But - since it is unclear who would deserve the credit - that TOE will never happen. BTW - back to size. A neutron, which might or might not "consist of" a proton, an electron plus some extra mass energy assumed to be a neutrino, is most often said to be about 2.2 proton diameters in diameter. An electron is about 5.6 proton diameters. Although the proton is ~1836 times more massive than the electron, the electron is larger in volume, no problem; and so, and so the neutron being about ~1838 times more massive a hydrogen atom might be expected to somehow average-out that size difference. Hydrogen has the electron orbiting 53,000 proton diameters from the proton. Somehow that electron can be brought nearer to the proton without any kind of charge anihilation, and can form a neutron with a diameter 2.2x ... or not, if one prefers to look at this from a quark perspective.... which is like opening up another can of worms. For some kinds of visualization of nuclear interactions - it would be helpful to have these relative sizes in mind ... too bad that is not yet possible. Jones
-- That which yields isn't always weak.
